20 Years Later Packers Still Contenders

This season marks the 20th anniversary of the 1996 Green Bay Packers, who were one of the most dominant teams, top to bottom, in franchise history.  A 13-3 record, the league's top offense and defense and an emphatic championship culminated in a special season.  

Two decades later, save for a few seasons sprinkled in, the Packers continue to be top contenders.  14 playoff teams, five non-playoff teams, and three of those were still .500 or better.  Many fans out there want to say playoff appearances mean nothing.  In that sense, the Packers have "failed" over the aforementioned time span.  Yes, failed is in quotes because as much as everyone is entitled to their opinion, the idea that the Packers haven't maintained their success is an example of a wrong opinion.

The Packers organization has been able to carry the torch that was lit by Ron Wolf, Mike Holmgren and the teams that they built coming out of the previous two decades of futility.  Brett Favre, Reggie White and a cast of free agents and draftees made Sunday's exciting again.  Lambeau Field got a big face lift in 2002 and added more seats just a few years ago.  The team added another championship in 2010 and appear to have another Hall of Fame quarterback in their midst.  

Favre was the product of a trade and the incredible eye for talent that Wolf had.  Aaron Rodgers, a draft pick by Ted Thompson, the team's current general manager.  Thinking about that '96 team and how it was built only adds fuel to the current fire of fans who want to see Thompson and the Packers more actively trying to improve this roster.  Added to that team at some point prior to the championship season were: White, Frank Winters, Gilbert Brown, Santana Dotson, Eugene Robinson, Sean Jones, Don Bebe, Desmond Howard and we'll throw in Andre Rison, who joined in December that year.  Those are just the bigger names.  There were others.  Granted, this was 20 years ago, but there's still proof that the right experienced guys can catapult a team to bigger and better things.

The initial wave of the current free agency period has passed, along with the insane sums of money that came with it.  The Packers haven't participated in that time frame for years so that's not news to anyone.  But many are talking are talking about how Green Bay potentially dropped the ball by not at least entering the discussion for linebacker Danny Trevathan, who signed with the Chicago Bears instead.  And why didn't the Packers try to get after one of the better tight ends in this free agent class, like Ladarius Green?  Jared Cook remains a possibility but to put him next to any of the names listed above is unfair to just about everyone involved.

We'll probably never get straight answers to those questions and Thompson himself went on record as saying that the Packers have done "a lot of considering" in free agency thus far.  Again, to those Packers fans who want trophies in the case, that's worth a ticket to yesterday's game.  To those who prefer to be appreciative of the team's sustained success, I say that playoff appearances and division titles are nothing to scoff at.  No team has ever won a ring without first reaching the playoffs and we've seen Packers teams who were the top seed and the sixth seed win it all.

It may be extremely frustrating and boring to endure, but it's hard to say that this administration hasn't at least earned the benefit of the doubt in terms of the roster it fields each year.  At this point in the early spring and with no actual football to come, I wanted to acknowledge the anniversary of one of best seasons this team has seen in nearly a century of play.  And, more than likely, we'll see more good than bad this year too.  

Enjoy this short look back:

-------------------

Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (55)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
sheppercheeser's picture

March 28, 2016 at 05:59 am

It's hard to dispute the title of this piece. 20 years and still a contender or you could say, 20 opportunities and only one SB win with two HOF QBs.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 01:47 pm

2 SB titles with 2 HOF QBs... You are so greedy that you forget one SB title in pathetic try to support your opinion... Facts are facts.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 28, 2016 at 09:34 pm

If the Super Bowl is the only thing that matters please stop watching the rest of the games - I will call you up before the Super Bowl and remind you.

By your criteria there is no successful team over the last 20 years in the NFL. Even your precious Patriots lost 16 times with no ring to show for it and went over a decade between wins which if you were a Patriot fan I am sure you'd be on their site saying this same nonsense there.

0 points
0
0
sheppercheeser's picture

March 28, 2016 at 06:01 am

oops, 2 SB wins.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:14 am

That's a pretty big whoops shepper.. haha

0 points
0
0
sheppercheeser's picture

March 28, 2016 at 06:02 am

My point is still the same. Look at the Patriots and their winning percentage during that same time.

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:13 am

Look at the Browns and Lions and their winning percentage during that time. What's your point?

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

March 28, 2016 at 09:01 am

I think the point is much more could have been done to win the Trophy they play the game in the first place for.

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 28, 2016 at 10:35 am

So many people say that, but I see so few answers as to what they could have done that would have magically gotten them all these other SB wins? Free Agents? OK, which ones? And would you have been able to pick those guys before the season started, or only with 20-20 hindsight? The fact is, that most years over the past 20 years, we have gone into the season thinking that the Packers had a pretty good team. Certainly capable of winning the division and getting to the playoffs. There are always weaknesses, sure. But every team in the current free agency setup has weaknesses.
Hindsight is a pessimist's fuel for bullshit theories about how the team could have been better. But the truth is, none of us have a clue about how to build a team and we should just sit back, relax, and enjoy the season.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 01:50 pm

Lets look at the Patriots - they won SB after they were beaten by Packers in the regular season... So, we can say they were lucky that they avoided Packers after all...

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 28, 2016 at 09:55 pm

The Packers have had some awful losses in playoffs. The Super Bowl loss against Denver where they looked listless and unprepared, 4th and 26, the Jerry Rice fumbled game, the Seattle championship meltdown, the two awful losses to the Giants in Lambeau, two overtime losses to the Cardinals. But - so has every team had losses like that in the playoffs. In the playoffs every game is a big game against another good team. The only reason the Packers have so many of them is because they are always in the playoffs and always in these games at the end.

For every Super Bowl win if you ran back time and started the playoffs over again you would get a different winner nearly every single time. No one is that much better than anyone else come playoff time. When the Packers won in 2010 they were one play away from losing every game of the playoffs. (The 1996 team was different and dominated every game and should get more love as one of the best teams of all time. But a team with the Number 1 defense, the Number 1 offense and the Number 1 Special teams does not happen often)

The point is if that the only way for a team to be successful in your eyes is to win the Bowl then no matter what team you root for you are going to be disappointed way, way more times than you are happy.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 06:23 am

20 years of success, winning, and great football! Still not enough for some people. Truly amazing.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 01:50 pm

I'm your fan!

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:15 am

It just blows me away that there are people who take the stance that if we don't win the SB, the season was a failure. This game of football must be a very disappointing pastime for those people.

Frankly, I've enjoyed the hell out the last 20 years of GBP football and hope they manage another 2 SB's in the next 20 years. We should only be so lucky.

0 points
0
0
phillythedane's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:32 am

Amen, brother. It's been a blast.

0 points
0
0
Point-Packer's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:27 am

Franchise QB's are rare. Two HOF QB's in a row are even rarer. If we don't win another SB during the Rodgers era, someone will have failed. And the blame will likely be placed on MM or TT.

The blind complacency from the extreme homers is obnoxious.

0 points
0
0
ES 1957's picture

March 28, 2016 at 09:44 pm

So do you blame Ron Wolf for his failure?

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 31, 2016 at 09:12 pm

Where is it written that a HoF caliber QB automatically is a shoe-in to win multiple Superbowls... or else someone failed?

Less than 50% of modern era HoF QB's have won multiple Superbowls as starters (10 of 25, although the percentage could break 50% when Brady and Peyton make the HOF, if Eli Manning makes the HoF as well). What that tells me is that even if you are one of the greatest QB's to ever play the game, NOTHING is guaranteed. Winning a SB is tough work and it takes a measure of luck.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:11 pm

Spot on Oppy. This year the Broncos won the Bowl with JAG or probably even worse than JAG at QB, Now this JAG will be in the Hall one day soon but anyone watching 2015 Peyton knows he was just back there not to screw it up.

Teams win Super Bowls. Having a top QB can cover up some deficiencies but it is no coincidence that Favre won his one Super Bowl when he had the Number 1 Defense and Number 1 Special Teams in the League to back him up.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 29, 2016 at 02:07 am

LOL. OK, so let’s just review your recent posts for a moment, Point Packer.

You call Brett Favre “the ol’ dong slinger” and a “bonehead.” You refer to Mike Sherman and Shawn Slocum as “a piece of shit” or some version of that (three times). Eddie Lacy was “obese garbage” last year. You say that people who don’t accept your personal view that TT’s “dogma” is a hindrance are “high on meth.”

When PaulRosik (below) says that people need to enjoy each game and each season, you call him “pathetic,” and then embark on a verbal crusade against the perceived mediocrity of the GB Packers. And in this post (above), when PackerBacker says that he has enjoyed the past 20 years, and phillythedane agrees (Oh, the horror!!), you say the blind complacency from the extreme homers is “obnoxious.”

How precious. But just FYI, you might consider the fact that there is one than one way to be pathetic and obnoxious.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 28, 2016 at 10:05 pm

I agree. You have to enjoy each game and each season. I guess it is the approach the Packers take with not going after many free agents that make these people feel more could be done. And somehow they think that a team that has had a 84 - 40 - 1 record since 2009 and made the playoffs seven straight years is going to change their approach. That is really funny.

0 points
0
0
Point-Packer's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:24 pm

What's really funny is how we may end up winning only two Super Bowls with 25 plus straight years with a Hall of Fame QB at the helm and you are ok with that. That's what's really funny with your pathetic comment.

Brett Favre won as many Super Bowls as Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Brad Johnson and Jeff Hostetler. You ok with that? Think its funny? I think its sad. And if Mike Sherman wasn't such a shit GM or Brett wasn't such a bone-head in big games, he may have got another. Emphasis on Mike Sherman being a piece of shit GM.

Right now #12 is in the same boat and I for one, am not interested in him retiring with one SB with GB. In fact, I may even be pissed if he only wins two. Hell, if it weren't for MM deciding that his loyalty would trump performance by keeping that piece of shit special teams coach in town, #12 may already have two SB's notched on his belt.

Only a handful of teams have a chance to win a SB every year, based on who they have at QB. GB is among them. So is New England. Look what they have done with Brady. That's what I expect.

So yeah, I don't think its funny.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:18 pm

You need to give it up then. To your mind there has been one team in the League the last 20 years that has been "successful". That team has a guy that will be at or near the top of every future GOAT discussion at QB and head coach. So lets face it if it takes that level of a historic coach/QB combo to be successful in your eyes than no team will be successful for you again for the next 20 years. So give it up and go watch competitive tiddlywinks - I hear the champ has a streak of 5 Super Twinks in a row.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:30 am

It is being reported by reputable sources that the Packers have signed Jared Cook.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/insidersblog/2016/03...

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:39 am

The salary cap was established to create a more equality and to end to a degree any team being a dynasty via winning the championship and or the yearly return to the final.
With this, the success bar is being lowered/altered to making the conference final, to the division round, winning the division regardless of how distraught division rivals have become and then to simply making the playoffs and ignoring a one and done dynasty in a way.
Partcipation in the playoffs has become the mantra of success for many and those like a team can become too adapting of such placidity.
Winning is winning and no matter one's defense of the Packers for 2 Super Bowls over 20 years with two future Hall of Famers back to back, the Packers have failed in the overall based on that but could be graded well enough via selective eyes and minds to satisfy thirst but the end grade is 'partcipation' award.

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 28, 2016 at 10:28 am

That thoroughly confuses me.

You start by saying that the current nature of the NFL, due to the free agency set-up (and the worst to best line-up of the draft, not mentioned, but a factor as well) leads to much greater parity in the league and an inability for any team to establish a "Dynasty".

You then, correctly, state that the new definition of successful is making the playoffs and having a chance to make a run at the SB.

But then you follow all of that up with them only getting a "participation award" because they've been arguably the second best team over those two decades at doing the best they can in a system set against them being successful over a long period of time?

You can't have it both ways. If you acknowledge the system is set up to keep teams from winning multiple SB's in a short period of time. Then DON'T BLAME THE PACKERS FOR NOT WINNING MULTIPLE SB's IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME!!!

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:22 am

The salary cap makes things equal to a point but if a team is fortunate enough to have back to back QB ' S of fame status and do less than those who have at times had never one of same level or has seen one obtain 10 conference games and 6 SB entries with 4 wins during 3/4 of same years. How is being one and done even with the glorious division titles considered success full unless you accept a lower bar for its rewarding of it.
I do not accept entry to the playoffs as successful but what you do against the others of assumed best of the rest and one and done doesn't raise that assumed prestige but diminishes it when you have the best in the game at the most important podition...assumedly.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:32 am

Taryn - You're approaching Archie/Big T status. Back away from the edge before you start adding vile and vulgar words like those cretins.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 28, 2016 at 12:36 pm

I'll never be vile or vulgar though se may have a line so thin that crossing it is possible while not actually doing so.

My point is simple....if the hopes of many is seeing Rodgers win another 1-2 more SB'S doesn't come about in the next 8 years come age 40, how can these years of two hall entrants be considered a success while a yearly repeat of not gaining entrance into the SB diminishes the very thoughts of what a scenario as such should have achieved to justify the praise.
Excuses will have small merit when all is done.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

March 28, 2016 at 02:22 pm

The cliff is near! Rodgers is gone two years from now, if much, much, much more effort isn't put in to improving what is put on the field, hence the cliff.

The cliff; a participation complacency award.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 12:30 am

If the time is near when we need to transition from one QB to another, then dammit we should get on the phone and call the guy who guided us through the last QB transition so seemlessly that the Packers barely missed a beat.

Oh wait... that's Ted Thompson, and we've decided not to like him. Never mind.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:35 pm

You have and always will mistake fan passion for being happy they lost. No one is complacent and doesn't want to win. No one is happy when the Cardinals get a 60 yard play in overtime and the Pack blows the game. On my end that play resulted in a thrown item and breakage in the house,

But these are the Green Bay Packers. These are the fans who in 1992 had a waiting list thousands of names long for a team that had been in the playoffs twice in the last 25 years. So if you're waiting for Packers fans to be downbeat and not optimistic you are going to be here 50 years from now spouting your same argument.

Otherwise your point is exactly right. The salary cap and the extended playoff season requiring 3 or 4 games to win a Super Bowl have contributed to having fewer repeat champions. Modern era playoff games are a coin flip. And you are mad that the Packers are 7 - 6 in coin flips the last 7 seasons. I don't dislike having high standards I just think too many around here want to just torch the whole organization and start over rather than try to improve on what has been a successful formula.

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 28, 2016 at 03:53 pm

There are too many other factors that go into winning a SB than just having a HOF QB. You can't simplify it that much and make the claim that they aren't successful unless they have 1 or 2 more SB's before Rodgers retires.

We looked at the team at this point last year and said that they NEEDED an inside linebacker and a TE.

At the end of the year, it turns out they needed another top flight WR, and an OT. Both positions that were considered strengths at this time last year.

All you can do is roll with the best team you can assemble, and do that year in and year out. TT has proven that he can do that better than almost anyone.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:45 pm

You are correct that many factors go into winning a Super Bowl and that is all the more reason why a team needs to cash in on their chances while they have them. Because who knows if and when they will come again. You can define success any way you want and the Packers have been "successful" over the last 20+ seasons. But no matter how you define it there is no substitute for victory and there is only one NFL Champion every year. If you are not the champion everything else is a matter of how long it took to get eliminated. There is no consolation prize or moral victory. It's consoling to say that we make the playoffs every season but I'd rather have an SB trophy than a playoff appearance consolation prize again. The SB feels a lot better. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:04 pm

Thank you. Very well said.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

March 29, 2016 at 06:03 am

Thanks Since '61, well said.

0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

March 29, 2016 at 01:34 pm

We'd all prefer a SB than just a playoff appearance.

But since we can't have a SB win every year, there are going to be years where you need to be content with a playoff appearance and hopefully a deep run in the playoffs.

I'm not saying we won't be disappointed if they lose before they get there. But that doesn't mean that the team was a failure.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:43 pm

Yeah - somehow if you don't want to fire everyone and blow up the team and start over you are happy with losing.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

March 29, 2016 at 06:48 am

double post..

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

March 28, 2016 at 10:40 am

This response was so predictable any number of posters could have penned it for the writer. The Packers and Patriots have been the two best franchises over the past 20 years. There is no disputing that. Cute bromides about participation awards do not change unalterable facts.

An explanation of the circumstances/luck necessary each year to win the title, regardless of the QB, would fall on deaf ears. Michigan State should have easily beaten MTSU, they did not.

0 points
0
0
Point-Packer's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:21 am

That picture makes me think about how Aaron Rodgers is so much better than the ol' dong slinger.

0 points
0
0
PortlandMark's picture

March 28, 2016 at 03:10 pm

So who is winning all the SBs? People will no doubt point to NE but just look at how close they were to not winning any SBs. A fumble becomes and incomplete pass; last second field goals, the best running team throwing a pick from the 1. IMO, consistently making the playoffs is the mark of success. Playoff games are often close, decided by one play. The Packers lost 5 playoff games on the last play. Those games could easily have gone the other way and then we wouldn't be discussing this. Here's to hoping for better luck in the playoffs the next time they make it.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:51 pm

The NY GIants are 4 - 0 in playoff games since 2009. Yes that means they won two Super Bowls. They are only 4 - 0 because the other 5 seasons they did not make the playoffs. I would rather be the Packers and in the playoffs seven years straight then not even in the tournament 5 of those years even with two wins.

I agree that playoff games against other top contenders are a coin flip. Now with that said I think the Championship game against Seattle was a failure of epic proportions and that team was the one ready to win the Bowl. But a QB on one leg left the game close enough to blow it at the end.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

March 28, 2016 at 04:43 pm

I remember all to well the 1970s no thanks I will take what we have now, many are to young to remember that long dry spell it was not pretty.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

March 28, 2016 at 09:44 pm

The last 20 plus seasons going back to 1992 have been great. And we have been fortunate to be Packers fans during this time. I also remember the glory days of the '60s and the abyss of the 70s and 80s. There are many differences between the current era of the NFL and the NFL of the 60s. However, unlike Lombardi's Packers of the 60s, our current Packers are literally one unlucky hit on Aaron Rodgers away from returning to the abyss. Not only that but Packers fans expect Rodgers to play another 5-7 seasons. He very well may play that long but not necessarily with the Packers. When his contract is up in a few seasons he could sign with another team. A team that demonstrates they are committed to winning another SB for Rodgers. The Broncos will probably be ready to try for another SB with an experienced QB by then. They did what they needed to do to win with Peyton. Elway could do it again. The 49ers, Raiders, and the born again LA Rams all have unsettled QB situations and Aaron may want to finish his career in his home state. Signing Aaron Rodgers would be a nice way to fill the $2 billion space ship of a stadium the Ram's owner is building, so if he wants Rodgers he won't be outbid. Think of the perfect Hollywood script it would be for Aaron to lead the Rams to an SB with his homecoming queen Olivia by his side. Then again Aaron is a bright guy, he may decide to leave the game rather than risk his future to more concussions and blows to the head and leave us with Hundley. Who knows? But the abyss could return any time and that's why even with our success over the last 20 seasons there is no substitute for victory. Sports are about winning now, today, if not, now could be 20 or more years away like the 70s and 80s. So yes, the last 20 years have been great but we should never lose focus on the fact that there is only one champion every season and whether you finish 2nd or 32nd your team is one of the losers. So while it's great to have a chance every season, it's better to cash in on those chances because you don't when they will come again and it makes dealing with the eventual abyss a little easier to deal with. All good things come to an end and I would sure like to take the memories of a few more SBs with me into the next Packer downturn because at some point it can't be avoided. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 28, 2016 at 11:09 pm

After Farve, if Rodgers left prematurely I'd lose it. Even without the Farve element I'd still lose it. That would be the worst especially if we won another SB or two with him. He must retire a Packer, and a Packer only.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

March 29, 2016 at 06:26 am

CLEARLY People have forgotten the 2013 season. The Packers were 2-7-1 without Rodgers and may have been 0-10 if Thompson hadn't swallowed his pride, admitted his mistake, and brought back Matt Flynn to help save the season. Pittsburgh and New England have gone periods of time without their "Franchise QB" and not gone in the toilet.

In fairness to Ted, the Packers are better equipped NOW to deal with an injury to AR but my point is he same as Since '61's. You just never know when it will end.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:15 pm

Since we all know the Packers are a draft and develop team any failure of the last few years was due to failures in the draft. In 2008 the Packers got Nelson, FInley, Sitton and Flynn. In 2009 the Packers got Raji, Matthews, Lang, and Brad Jones. In 2010 the Packers got Bulaga, Neal, Burnett, Quarless, and Starks. All have played and many still are playing significant roles.

Along with players already on the roster this was a deep and talented squad that won the Bowl in 2010. After that failures with Sherrod, Alex Green, Worthy, and some others the Packers failed to replace players leaving in the offensive line, running back and defensive backfield. The result was some flawed teams propelled by a great QB.

But over the past few drafts the Packers have restocked and added starting linemen Bakhtiari and Linsley, a back in Lacy, and Hyde, Clinton Dix, Rollins and Randall in the defensive backfield. Plus adding Peppers on the D line. If the Packers had continued to have drafts like 2012 I might be on the side of the fire everyone crowd. But I see a team much better than it was several years ago.

2014 was a missed opportunity and was a team good enough to win the Super Bowl. But this team will always be judged on the ability to draft players that can step in and be significant starters. So it is up to players like Rollins, Randall, Ryan, Ripkowski, and Montgomery to step up and show they can keep the standard high.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

March 28, 2016 at 08:57 pm

Thanks Since '61, for the refreshing dose of reality.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:27 am

As a fan, I can enjoy an 8-8 season. If the team looks like it is improving I consider it a successful season. In GB we have had two HOF QBs back to back with just 2 SB wins and 3 appearances in 23 years. Not bad at all, but not what might have been.

I am acquainted (just barely) with a world class athlete who right now is dominating her sport and is #1 in the world. There have been pressure-packed moments, and she clearly has had a successful career already. She will be competing in the Olympics in Rio this August. I don't know what she would consider a successful performance, but I'd guess that she would be disappointed if she did not earn a medal, if not the gold. This is akin to the Green Bay Packers franchise to me.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 01:01 am

How many people are on the team that competes for her sport? I mean, is it a solo sport, or are there 22 players on the field at any given moment?

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 01:02 am

I understand disappointment, but there should be an understanding of reasonable expectation based on the details and logistics of the sport in question.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 29, 2016 at 05:40 am

She competes in triathlon - Gwen Jorgensen, so yes, it is a solo sport, and your observation is just in comparing her situation to all of the factors faced by the packers. She had a good chance in the 2012 Olympics but her bicycle got a flat. (Insert comedic line comparing the flat tire to GB).

I have suggested that getting to the conference championship game is a successful season, but I am just moving the goalpost a bit from others. In any event, I am not anxious to replace TT (with Wolf or anyone else) since I think TT has done, overall, a very good job.

0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:23 pm

Teams have a cycle and I think the Packers were pointed upward to winning in 2014 when they somehow forgot to play the last 3 minutes of the NFC Championship game.

But with the Packers it is always how they draft and replace talent. The post 2010 Packers were haunted by losses on the offensive line, at running back and the unexpected loss of a great safety. That they were able to win games with Marshall Freaking Newhouse playing offensive line, not a running back to be seen anywhere and the worst safety play to be seen in the NFL in decades is a testament to the rest of the team. They have upgraded these positions and now like Whack A Mole new needs pop up.

Lets hope they continue to draft well and fill the holes and keep the standard high and won't be left looking back like the Wolf teams must look back at how the heck did they not win two SB's in a row.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

March 30, 2016 at 06:11 am

The last 3 drafts have been excellent, there's no disputing that. After each draft in 2013, 2014, and 2015, the Packers got a huge amount of production out of the Rookie Class for that season. If Ted can pull off another draft like those, I feel a whole lot better about the number of FA's the Packers have next season.

0 points
0
0